On December 18th (Tuesday), Wikihub will be unavailable from 7-9am.

Navigation:
Documentation
Archive



Page Tree:

Child pages
  • Proposed 6 Month Workplan

This wiki space contains archival documentation of Project Bamboo, April 2008 - March 2013.

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Scholarly Narratives

Program Section 3.3 - Proposed Goals

  1. REPOSITORY OF NARRATIVES: Build an evolving collection of discrete scholarly workflows from the arts, humanities and interpretive social sciences that can enable:
    1. Individual faculty member to assess whether their unique scholarly efforts come under the purview, are known to, and/or might be supported by Project Bamboo.
    2. Individual institutions to assess whether the scholarly efforts of their faculty members or those of similar institutions come under the purview, are known to, and/or might be supported by Project Bamboo. These workflows should meet the following criteria.
    • Be a bounded set of scholarly activity (activities),
    • Be written in a narrative style,
    • Be written from the vantage point of a scholar,
    • Lists the tools that support any part of their workflow, and
    • Be searchable - (by insitution name, institution type, discipline, field, user, methodology, task, tool, and tag).
  2. RECIPES: Associate an abstract model/representation of each workflow, validated by a faculty member(s), along with any alternative models/representations that reflect highly similar workflows in order to enable:
    1. Faculty support personnel, technologists, and/or toolmakers to more quickly assess faculty needs;
    2. Services developers to assess commonality and need across workflows; and
    3. Workflow collectors to bound the scope of their documents to a single model/representation. The models/representations should meet the following criteria:
    • Use a controlled vocabulary when describing a scholarly activity,
    • Associate/link the controlled terms to a definition (bi-directional with activities),
    • Associate/link the controlled terms to a narrative description (bi-directional with narratives),
    • List the scholarly activities of the workflow in any required order(s).
  3. TOOLS: Associate extant tools used by other faculty and/or offered by toolmakers for use on a specific workflow in order to enable:
    1. Faculty members and/or their support personnel to more quickly discover tools related to their scholarly efforts;
    2. Services developers to better understand faculty needs by comparing the capabilities of a product in relation to scholarly workflow; and
    3. Tool makers to display a tool with a specific academic use in a highly focused venue . This tool association should meet the following criteria:
    • Tool name, provider and contact information,
    • Short description of the tool's capabilities using a controlled vocabulary,
    • A link to a detailed description of the tool,
    • A denotation of which of the tool's capabilities relate to this workflow (bi-directional with recipes), and
    • Information about the submitter, i.e. a faculty member, a business, etc.
  4. CHECKS AND BALANCES: Provide a body of content whereby Project Bamboo can be reviewed as to whether it is appropriately capturing the scope of scholarly work performed in arts, humanities, and interpretive social sciences and reflective of the range of institutions engaged in Project Bamboo.

6-Month Workplan - Proposed Goals

  1. Collect and maintain an evolving corpus of scholarly narratives from which to perform analysis.
  2. Facilitate and contribute to the completion of 40 annotated narratives in collaboration with the TCP and Services working groups that include a
    • bounded narrative
    • recipe
    • tool list
    • bi-directional link: narrative description to activity
    • bi-directional link: recipe ingredient to activity
    • validation signature (faculty sign off)
    • metadata: see goal 1
  3. Define, document and actively use a draft methodology to
    • solicit narratives
    • capture narratives
    • assess narratives
    • submit and receive narratives to Services and T&CP for analysis and annotation
    • review narratives with faculty
    • review representation of narratives with external reviewers (deans?)
  4. Identify and request support from Program Staff
    • Outside reviewers of repository (Strategic Communications)
    • Outside reviewers of complete individual narratives (Strategic Communications, Program Staff, SchNar)
    • Formal presentation tool for the narrative repository in collaboration with program staff and TCP, SC, and SSER
  5. In collaboration with SSer and TCP, identify a low-threshold means of displaying the 40 narratives and annotation.

Timeline

No.

Due Date

Milestones

WG

TriGroup

Others

PS

 

Feb 9

* Define annotation process around capturing narratives, linking activities, and building recipes
* Define narrative, activity, tool, recipe and service
* Brainstorm demonstrator / presentation tool of complete narratives

 

x

 

 

 

Feb 10

  • Review tri-group process and definitions
  • Define narrative assessment process
  • Select clear candidates narratives to initiate the annotation process - set 1
  • Forward candidates narratives to  Services and T&CP, due Feb 23
  • Identify candidate faculty review teams that can validate narratives, due Feb 24
  • Identify support needed from program staff for gathering reviewers, due Feb 10
  • Assign tasks of developing faculty review teams and three review dates by W4, initial date post Feb 24
  • Assess whether another tool should be researched to capture and annotate the narratives
  • If necessary, assign task to research tools for the narrative repository, due Feb 23
  • Assign narratives that need decomposing to WG members, due Feb 23
  • Assess and define process of soliciting narratives, due Feb 10
  • Solicit next set of narratives by Feb 10

x

 

 

 

 

Feb 10

  • Document narrative solicitation process

x

 

 

 

 

Feb 10

  • Request additional narratives

 

 

 

 

 

Feb 17

  • Document narrative assessment process

x

 

 

 

 

Feb 17

  • Document annotation process

 

x

 

 

 

Feb 17

  • Assign newly received narratives for assessment

x

 

Duffy to members

 

 

Feb 20

  • Draft demonstrator requirements for formal presentation of repository

 

x

SC

x

 

Feb 23

  • Develop faculty review teams for annotated narratives

x

 

 

x

 

Feb 23

  • Assign demonstrator for formal presentation of repository

 

 

 

x

 

Feb 23

  • Develop review teams for narrative representation and scope

 

 

SC

x

 

Feb 23

  • Annotate narratives

 

 

SSer, TCP

 

 

Feb 23

  • Decompose assigned narratives
  • Review new narratives

x

 

 

 

 

Feb 23

  • Research and document simple tools for the narrative repository

 

 

 

 

 

Feb 23

* Review narrative annotation process

 

x

 

x

 

Feb 24

  • Review overall annotation process
  • Review annotated narratives - set 1
  • Assign annotated narratives to faculty review teams - set 1
  • Review decomposed narratives
  • Review/present new narratives
  • Select narratives to enter the annotation process - set 2
  • Assign narratives that need decomposing to WG members, due Mar 9
  • Define feedback desired by representation review teams, due Feb 25
  • Initiate representation review, due by Mar 9
  • Solicit next set of narratives by Feb 25
  • Provide feedback on presentation tool

x

 

 

 

 

Mar 2

  • Assign newly received narratives for assessment

x

 

Duffy to members

 

 

Mar 9

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mar 9

  • Decompose assigned narratives
  • Review new narratives

x

 

 

 

 

Mar 9

* Review annotation process to date

 

x

 

x

 

Mar 9

  • Review narrative repository for scope and representation

x

 

SC?, Review team

 

 

Mar 10

  • Review representation review
  • Review annotated narratives - set 2
  • Assign annotated narratives to faculty review teams - set 2, due by Mar 23
  • Review decomposed narratives
  • Review/present new narratives
  • Select narratives to enter the annotation process - set 3
  • Assign narratives that need decomposing to WG members, due Feb 23
  • Assess and define process of soliciting narratives, due Feb 10
  • Solicit next set of narratives, due Mar 11

 

 

 

 

 

Mar 13

  • Review of narrative repository for Strategic Communications

 

 

SC

 

 

Mar 16

  • Assign newly received narratives for assessment

x

 

Duffy to members

 

 

Mar 23

  • Decompose assigned narratives
  • Review new narratives

x

 

 

 

 

Mar 24

  • Review annotated narratives - set 3
  • Assign annotated narratives to faculty review teams - set 3, due by Mar 23
  • Review decomposed narratives
  • Review/present new narratives
  • Select narratives to enter the annotation process - set 4
  • Assign narratives that need decomposing to WG members, due Apr 6
  • Assess and refine process of soliciting narratives
  • Solicit next set of narratives, due Mar 25

 

 

 

 

 

Mar 30

  •  Review narrative repository for scope and representation

 

 

SC?, Review Team

 

 

Mar 31

  • Present version of  formal presentation tool and collect feedback

 

?

SC, Demo owner

x

 

Apr 6

  • Review annotated narratives - set 4
  • Assign annotated narratives to faculty review teams - set 4, due by Apr 9
  • Review decomposed narratives
  • Review/present new narratives
  • Select narratives to enter the annotation process - set 5
  • Assign narratives that need decomposing to WG members, due Apr 13
  • Assess and refine process of soliciting narratives
  • Solicit next set of narratives, due Mar Apr 7
  • Prepare for W4

x

 

 

x

Scholarly Narrative Working Group

Old Charter

The Stories working group shall collect narratives and/or illustrative examples on behalf of all Bamboo working groups that express particular aspects of scholarship, scholarly workflow, research, and/or teaching that are or could be facilitated by technology. The working group shall define a structured Bamboo-wide methodology for collecting stories so that materials gathered by one working group will be materially significant to another. In addition, the working group shall document its methodology so that it can be considered as a model for story gathering in the implementation project. The Stories working group shall suggest ways to enhance and/or reformulate Four/Six presentations to contribute to the story gathering process.


Revised Charter - Duffy

The Scholarly Narratives working group shall collect narratives and/or illustrative examples on behalf of all Bamboo working groups that express particular aspects of scholarship, scholarly workflow, research, and/or teaching that are or could be facilitated by technology. The working group shall define a structured Bamboo-wide methodology for collecting stories so that materials gathered by one working group will be materially significant to another. In addition, the working group shall document its methodology so that it can be considered as a model for story gathering in the implementation project. The Scholarly Narratives work group will collaborate with Project Bamboo workshop coordinators to arrange activities which promote the sharing, collection and analysis of narratives.


Revised Charter - Proposed by RTM

The Scholarly Narratives working group shall collect narratives and/or illustrative examples on behalf of all Bamboo working groups that express particular aspects of scholarship, scholarly workflow, research, and/or teaching with an initial emphasis on those that are or could be facilitated by technology. It will maintain both a raw collection of all gathered narratives as well as a subset of annotated narratives to be used in strategic decision-making.

In collaboration with other working groups, most immediately, the Shared Services and Tool and Content Partner working group, the Scholarly Narratives working group shall define a structured Bamboo-wide methodology for collecting, annotating and validating these narratives so that materials gathered by one working group will be materially significant to another. In addition, the working group shall document its methodology so that it can be considered as a model for scholarly workflow gathering in the implementation project.

The Scholarly Narratives working group will collaborate with Project Bamboo program staff to arrange activities and demonstrations which promote the sharing, collection and analysis of narratives.

The Scholarly Narratives Working Group shall be responsible for drafting elements of the Bamboo Program Document, as identified by the Program Staff. Elements of the Bamboo Program Document will be the basis of a Bamboo Implementation Proposal to the Mellon Foundation's RIT program, to be submitted in October 2009.

  • No labels